DOCSLIB.ORG

Covert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Bill

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Covert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Bill HOUSE OF LORDS Select Committee on the Constitution 19th Report of Session 2019–21 Covert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Bill Ordered to be printed 19 November 2020 and published 19 November 2020 Published by the Authority of the House of Lords HL Paper 174 Select Committee on the Constitution The Constitution Committee is appointed by the House of Lords in each session “to examine the constitutional implications of public bills coming before the House; and to keep under review the operation of the constitution and constitutional aspects of devolution.” Membership The Members of the Constitution Committee are: Lord Beith Baroness Fookes Lord Sherbourne of Didsbury Baroness Corston Lord Hennessy of Nympsfield Baroness Taylor of Bolton (Chair) Baroness Drake Lord Howarth of Newport Lord Wallace of Tankerness Lord Dunlop Lord Howell of Guildford Lord Faulks Lord Pannick Declaration of interests A full list of Members’ interests can be found in the Register of Lords’ Interests: http://www.parliament.uk/mps-lords-and-offices/standards-and-interests/register-of-lords- interests Publications All publications of the Committee are available at: http://www.parliament.uk/hlconstitution Parliament Live Live coverage of debates and public sessions of the Committee’s meetings are available at: http://www.parliamentlive.tv Further information Further information about the House of Lords and its committees, including guidance to witnesses, details of current inquiries and forthcoming meetings is available at: http://www.parliament.uk/business/lords Committee staff The current staff of the committee are Matt Korris (Clerk), Ava Mayer (Policy Analyst) and Dan Weedon (Committee Assistant). Professor Stephen Tierney and Professor Jeff King are the legal advisers to the Committee. Contact details All correspondence should be addressed to the Constitution Committee, Committee Office, House of Lords, London SW1A 0PW. Telephone 020 7219 5960. Email constitution@ parliament.uk Covert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Bill Introduction 1. The Covert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Bill was introduced in the House of Commons on 24 September 2020 and completed its passage on 15 October. It was brought to the House of Lords on 19 October and had its second reading on 11 November. Committee stage is scheduled to begin on 24 November. 2. The Bill provides powers to authorise covert human intelligence sources to participate in conduct which would otherwise constitute a criminal offence. The Explanatory Notes to the Bill state this “is not new activity. It puts existing practice on a clear and consistent statutory footing … It is a continuation of existing practice that is currently authorised using a variety of legal bases.”1 We welcome this Bill in principle, as it brings transparency and legitimacy to the rules that apply to covert human intelligence sources. However, we have concerns about some of the Bill’s provisions, which we set out below. 3. The Joint Committee on Human Rights (JCHR) has reported on the Bill and raised concerns about its human rights implications.2 We welcome its assessment and draw on its conclusions in considering the constitutional issues raised by the Bill. Authorised activities 4. Clause 1 sets out a regime for “criminal conduct authorisations” (CCAs) that may apply to a covert human intelligence source (CHIS). It provides that criminal conduct may be authorised subject to the following constraints: • it is authorised at the same time as, or after, the (separate) authorisation of a CHIS; • the authorising official believes it to be necessary, proportionate and in accordance with any additional requirements imposed by order by the Secretary of State; • it is necessary in the interests of national security, for the purposes of preventing or detecting crime or of preventing disorder, or in the interests of the economic well-being of the United Kingdom; • the authorising official takes account of whether other non-criminal means could reasonably have been used; and • other relevant matters, including the requirements of the Human Rights Act 1998, are taken into account. 1 Covert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Bill [HL Bill 144 (2019–21)], Explanatory Notes, paras 2–8 2 Joint Committee on Human Rights, Legislative Scrutiny: Covert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Bill (Tenth Report, Session 2019–21, HC 847 / HL Paper 164) 2 COVert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Bill 5. The Bill provides no express limits on the types of criminal conduct which may be authorised. This approach contrasts with that in other countries, such as Canada, the United States of America and Germany, which statutorily forbid the authorisation of certain violent crimes. The UK Government’s position is that the Human Rights Act 1998 already imposes an effective limit on the criminal conduct that could be authorised under the Bill. The JCHR was not persuaded that this was sufficient.3 6. The circumstances in which the state may authorise the commission of what would otherwise be criminal offences are of fundamental concern to the rule of law. It is essential that the Bill places clear and express limits on the criminal conduct that may be authorised. The JCHR recommended that the Bill should prohibit the authorisation of serious criminal offences, modelled on the approach taken in the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act.4 The House should examine these proposals closely at committee stage. Purposes for which authorisation may be granted 7. As set out above, CCAs may be granted where they are necessary in the interests of national security, for the purposes of preventing or detecting crime or of preventing disorder, or in the interests of the economic well- being of the United Kingdom. 8. “Preventing disorder” and the “economic well-being of the United Kingdom” are broad and vague justifications for the authorisation of criminal conduct.5 The latter could relate to a wide class of conduct, including commercial activity that is entirely lawful and appropriate, as well as to the exercise of collective bargaining rights or other forms of lawful and appropriate trade union activity. While we recognise that threats to the “economic well- being of the United Kingdom” may justify a security response, we are concerned about the use of such a broad concept to authorise serious criminal conduct. The House may wish to consider whether the authorisation of criminal conduct should require more specific justification than a general invocation of the need to protect economic well-being. 9. We consider that it would assist both Houses for the Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliament to assess this issue in respect of this legislation and other statutes that contain the same justification. Authorising bodies 10. Clause 2(9) inserts a new Part A1 into schedule 1 to the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA). It lists the bodies that are capable of authorising criminal conduct. These are: 3 Ibid., paras 32–52 4 Following this approach, serious criminal offences could include causing death or bodily harm, violating the sexual integrity of an individual or wilfully attempting to obstruct the course of justice: Joint Committee on Human Rights, Legislative Scrutiny: Covert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Bill (Tenth Report, Session 2019–21, HC 847 / HL Paper 164), para 53 5 We recognise that the economic well-being of the UK is a purpose for which the authorisation of investigatory powers and other activities are already permitted. See, for example, the authorisation of surveillance under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 and warrants issued under the Investigatory Powers Act 2016. COVert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Bill 3 • Any police force • The National Crime Agency • The Serious Fraud Office • Any of the intelligence services • Any of Her Majesty’s forces • Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs • The Department of Health and Social Care • The Home Office • The Ministry of Justice • The Competition and Markets Authority • The Environment Agency • The Financial Conduct Authority • The Food Standards Agency • The Gambling Commission. 11. The Government has set out real and hypothetical examples of the circumstances in which these bodies might justifiably issue CCAs.6 12. However, the JCHR considered the range of public authorities to be excessively broad: “The authorisation of criminal conduct by the security and intelligence services and the police may on occasion be necessary to allow those agencies to carry out their vital functions. However, in the absence of satisfactory explanation from Government, it is hard to see any justification for extending the use of CCAs to bodies whose central function is not protecting national security or fighting serious crime.”7 13. We share the concerns of the JCHR about the range of bodies that may authorise criminal conduct. While national security and fighting serious crime are core functions of the police and the intelligence and security agencies, this is not the case for all the bodies listed in clause 2(9). The House may wish to consider whether it is appropriate for all the bodies listed in clause 2(9) to have the power to authorise criminal conduct. Accountability and oversight 14. Clause 4 extends the oversight function of the Investigatory Powers Commissioner to criminal conduct authorisations. It requires the Commissioner to keep under review the exercise of the power to grant authorisations and to report annually on the use of the powers. 6 Home Office, Operational Case Studies, 1 October 2020: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/ covert-human-intelligence-sources-draft-code-of-practice/covert-human-intelligence-sources-bill- case-studies-accessible-version [accessed 11 November 2020] 7 Joint Committee on Human Rights, Legislative Scrutiny: Covert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Bill (Tenth Report, Session 2019–21, HC 847 / HL Paper 164), para 81 4 COVert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Bill 15. However, there is no requirement in the Bill for prior authorisation of criminal conduct by an independent body.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Review of House of Lords Investigative and Scrutiny Committees: Towards a New Thematic Committee Structure
    HOUSE OF LORDS Liaison Committee 6th Report of Session 2017–19 Review of House of Lords Investigative and Scrutiny Committees: towards a new thematic committee structure Ordered to be printed 8 July 2019 and published 17 July 2019 Published by the Authority of the House of Lords HL Paper 398 Liaison Committee The Liaison Committee advises the House on the resources required for select committee work and allocates resources between select committees; reviews the select committee work of the House; considers requests for ad hoc committees and reports to the House with recommendations; ensures effective co-ordination between the two Houses; and considers the availability of Lords to serve on committees. Membership The Members of the Liaison Committee are: Lord Bradley (from 1 July 2019) Lord Lang of Monkton The Earl of Courtown (in place of Baroness Evans of Bowes Park) Lord Low of Dalston Baroness Evans of Bowes Park Lord McFall of Alcluith (Chair) Lord Foulkes of Cumnock (until 1 July 2019) Lord Newby Baroness Garden of Frognal (until 1 July 2019) Lord Tyler (from 1 July 2019) Baroness Hayter of Kentish Town Lord Smith of Hindhead Lord Hope of Craighead Lord Williams of Elvel Declaration of interests See Appendix 1. A full list of Members’ interests can be found in the Register of Lords’ Interests: http://www.parliament.uk/mps-lords-and-offices/standards-and-interests/register-of-lords- interests Publications All publications of the Committee are available at: http://www.parliament.uk/lords-liaison Parliament Live Live coverage of debates and public sessions of the Committee’s meetings are available at: http://www.parliamentlive.tv Further information Further information about the House of Lords and its Committees, including guidance to witnesses, details of current inquiries and forthcoming meetings is available at: http://www.parliament.uk/business/lords Committee staff The staff who worked on this inquiry were Philippa Tudor (Clerk), Alice Delaney (Research Assistant) and Heather Fuller (Committee Assistant).
    [Show full text]
  • Select Committee on the Constitution
    DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE THE CONSTITUTIONAL STANDARDS OF THE HOUSE OF LORDS SELECT COMMITTEE ON THE CONSTITUTION THIRD EDITION Jack Simson Caird, Robert Hazell and Dawn Oliver ISBN: 978-1-903903-77-3 Published by the Constitution Unit School of Public Policy University College London 29-31 Tavistock Square London WC1H 9QU Tel: 020 7679 4977 Fax: 020 7679 4978 Email: [email protected] Web: www.ucl.ac.uk/constitution-unit © The Constitution Unit, UCL 2017 This report is sold subject to the condition that it shall not, by way of trade or otherwise, be lent, hired out or otherwise circulated without the publisher’s prior consent in any form of binding or cover other than that in which it is published and without a similar condition including this condition being imposed on the subsequent purchaser. First Published November 2017 Contents Genesis of this project ..................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 2 Methodology .................................................................................................................................... 5 A Code of Constitutional Standards Based on the Reports of the House of Lords Constitution Committee ....................................................................................................................................... 6 1) The rule of law ................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Nations and Regions: the Dynamics of Devolution
    Nations and Regions: The Dynamics of Devolution Quarterly Monitoring Programme Devolution and the Centre Quarterly Report February 2003 by Guy Lodge The monitoring programme is jointly funded by the ESRC and the Leverhulme Trust 1 Contents Contents Key Points 1 Devolution and Westminster 1.1 House of Lords Debate on the Constitution 1.2 New Breakaway Conservative Party 1.3 House of Lords Constitution Committee 1.4 Regional Assemblies (Preparations) Bill 1.5 Parliamentary Questions to the Wales Office 1.6 The Work of the Territorial Select Committees 1.7 The Work of the Grand Committees 1.8 Select Committee on the Lord Chancellor’s Department 1.9 Minority Party Representation on Select Committees 1.10 Barnett Formula 1.11 House of Lords Reform 2 Devolution and Whitehall 2.1 Edwina Hart accuses Whitehall of obstructing National Assembly 2.2 Helen Liddell Announces Decision on MSP Numbers 2.3 The Future of the Territorial Offices 3 Intergovernmental Relations 3.1 Meeting of JMC (Europe) 3.2 British-Irish Council Summit 3.3 Meeting of the British-Irish Council Environment Group 3.4 Meeting of the British-Irish Council Drugs Group 3.5 UK Government and the Devolved Bodies Launch the Animal Health and Welfare Strategy Consultation 2 Key Points • Assembly Finance Minister Edwina Hart criticises Whitehall civil servants • Lord Norton debate on the British Constitution in the House of Lords • Helen Liddell announces that the number of MSPs will remain at 129 in the outcome of the consultation on the size of the Scottish Parliament. • House of Lords Constitution Committee publishes Devolution: Inter- Institutional Relations in the United Kingdom • House of Lords debate on the Barnett Formula • Second Reading and Committee Stage of the Regional Assemblies (Preparations) Bill • Seven options for Lords Reform fail to gain a majority.
    [Show full text]
  • Officers of Parliament— Transforming the Role by Oonagh Gay and Barry K Winetrobe
    Officers of Parliament— Transforming the role by Oonagh Gay and Barry K Winetrobe April 2003 ISBN: 1 903903 18 1 First Published April 2003 Copyright © The Constitution Unit Published by The Constitution Unit School of Public Policy, UCL 29–30 Tavistock Square London WC1H 9QU Phone: 020 7679 4977 Fax: 020 7679 4978 [email protected] www.ucl.ac.uk/constitution-unit/ This report is sold subject to the condition that is shall not, by way of trade or otherwise, be lent, hired out or otherwise circulated without the publisher’s prior consent in any form of binding or cover other than that in which it is published and without a similar condition including this condition being imposed on the subsequent purchaser. Contents Preface 5 Executive Summary 7 Part I Introduction and definitions 9 A What makes an Officer? 10 B The origins of the Officer of Parliament concept 11 C The constitutional Officers of Parliament 12 D Almost Officers of Parliament: The Electoral Commission 21 E Statutory constitutional watchdogs 23 F The non-statutory Nolan watchdogs 29 G Other non-statutory constitutional watchdogs 33 Part II Key Characteristics for an Officer of Parliament 39 A Themes of this research 39 B Defining characteristics for Officers 39 Part III The Scottish experience 49 A Introduction 49 B Key characteristics of a ‘parliamentary officer’ 51 C Conclusions and prospects 61 Part IV Conclusions 67 A Officers of Parliament Committee—a model 68 B Effective dialogue with Parliament 69 Appendix 1 Acronyms and abbreviations used in this study 73 Appendix
    [Show full text]
  • Fitting the Bill: Bringing Commons Legislation Committees Into Line with Best Practice
    DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE FITTING THE BILL BRINGING COMMONS LEGISLATION COMMITTEES INTO LINE WITH BEST PRACTICE MEG RUSSELL, BOB MORRIS AND PHIL LARKIN Fitting the Bill: Bringing Commons legislation committees into line with best practice Meg Russell, Bob Morris and Phil Larkin Constitution Unit June 2013 ISBN: 978-1-903903-64-3 Published by The Constitution Unit School of Public Policy UCL (University College London) 29/30 Tavistock Square London WC1H 9QU Tel: 020 7679 4977 Fax: 020 7679 4978 Email: [email protected] Web: www.ucl.ac.uk/constitution-unit/ ©The Constitution Unit, UCL 2013 This report is sold subject to the condition that is shall not, by way of trade or otherwise, be lent, hired out or otherwise circulated without the publisher’s prior consent in any form of binding or cover other than that in which it is published and without a similar condition including this condition being imposed on the subsequent purchaser. First Published June 2013 2 Contents Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................... 4 Executive summary ............................................................................................................... 5 Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 7 Part I: The current system .................................................................................................... 9 The Westminster legislative process in
    [Show full text]
  • Workshop on Committees in Comparative Perspective
    Post-Legislative Scrutiny in the UK Parliament: Adding Value PHILIP NORTON Legislatures appoint committees for different purposes. The UK Parliament is unusual in that both Houses utilise committees to engage in post-legislative scrutiny. We examine why each engages in this type of scrutiny, given competing demands for limited resources. Distributive and informational theories are utilised to explain the difference between the two chambers, identifying why the form of asymmetrical bicameralism to be found in the United Kingdom facilitates scrutiny that would otherwise not be undertaken. The genesis and impact of post-legislative scrutiny committees are considered, with a focus on the House of Lords and why the use of such committees plays to the strengths of the House. ______________________________________________ The UK Parliament, like other legislatures in Westminster systems of government, has been characterised by an emphasis on chamber deliberation at the expense of specialisation through committees. Although provision for the appointment of investigative committees (select committees) is longstanding, such committees were rarely used after the emergence in the 19th Century of party- dominated adversarial politics. The 20th Century was characterised primarily by House of Commons committees set up on ad hoc basis (albeit known as standing committees) to facilitate the passage of government legislation. In the unelected second chamber, the House of Lords, virtually all business was conducted through the chamber. The use of committees by the House of Commons was explicable in terms of partisan theory (Cox and McCubbins 1993). Given the chamber-oriented emphasis, the use of distributive and informational theories, used especially to explain legislative committees in the US Congress (see Shepsle 1978, Weingast, 1979, Gilligan and Krehbiel 1990, 1 Krehbiel 1990, 1992, Martorano 2006), had little salience.
    [Show full text]
  • Legacy Expert Panel Report to the Finance And
    Legacy Expert Panel Report to the Finance and Constitution Committee 12 February 2021 Contents Introduction 1 Membership 1 Summary of Recommendations 1 Background: How devolution works 5 Part 1: Scrutiny Challenges for the Successor Committee in Session 6 6 Immediate Challenges 7 Impact of COVID-19 7 Spring Fiscal Event 8 Further Challenges for Session 6 9 Embedding the new Budget Process 9 Review of the Fiscal Framework 11 Devolved Tax Legislation 12 Fiscal Responsibility and Sustainability 13 Financial implications of EU withdrawal 14 Scottish Tax Policies 15 Constitutional Change 16 Monitoring and co-ordinating how devolution is working after Brexit 16 Part 2: Improving the Committee’s Effectiveness 17 Core Function 18 Strategic Approach 18 Communicating more effectively 19 Capacity 20 Part 3: Scrutiny Challenges for the Parliament arising from Brexit 20 Primary and secondary legislation and legislative consent 21 Keeping pace power 22 Common Frameworks 22 UKIMA 23 The Changing Administrative Landscape 24 International Trade Agreements 25 Part 4: Risks and opportunities in developing this new scrutiny role 27 Annexe A 31 How Devolution Works 31 Tax Devolution 31 The impact of Brexit on the powers of the Scottish Parliament 33 Legislative Powers 33 Statutory and non-statutory constraints 34 EUWA Section 12 freezing regulations 35 International Trade Agreements 35 UK Internal Market Act 37 Common Frameworks 38 Annexe B 39 Introduction 1. The Finance and Constitution Committee (“the Committee”) established an expert panel (“the Panel”)
    [Show full text]
  • House of Lords Constitution Committee Inquiry Into the Legislative Process
    House of Lords Constitution Committee Inquiry into the Legislative Process The Passage of Legislation through Parliament 23 July 2018 Introduction The Law Society of Scotland is the professional body for over 11,000 Scottish solicitors. With our overarching objective of leading legal excellence, we strive to excel and to be a world-class professional body, understanding and serving the needs of our members and the public. We set and uphold standards to ensure the provision of excellent legal services and ensure the public can have confidence in Scotland’s solicitor profession. We have a statutory duty to work in the public interest, a duty which we are strongly committed to achieving through our work to promote a strong, varied and effective solicitor profession working in the interests of the public and protecting and promoting the rule of law. We seek to influence the creation of a fairer and more just society through our active engagement with the Scottish and United Kingdom Governments, Parliaments, wider stakeholders and our membership. The Society’s Constitutional Law Sub-committee welcomes the opportunity to respond to the Inquiry by the House of Lords Constitution Committee into The Legislative Process: the passage of legislation through Parliament. The Sub-committee has the following comments to put forward for consideration General Comments The legislative process in Parliament does require review. Significant developments have been and are occurring in the UK; these include changes relating to the constitution such as withdrawal from the European Union and further devolution to Scotland and Wales. There are also changes in Society at large and in the ways in which people live, learn and work caused by a number of factors including globalisation and the increased use of technology.
    [Show full text]
  • European Union (Withdrawal) Bill
    HOUSE OF LORDS Select Committee on the Constitution 9th Report of Session 2017–19 European Union (Withdrawal) Bill Ordered to be printed 24 January 2018 and published 29 January 2018 Published by the Authority of the House of Lords HL Paper 69 Select Committee on the Constitution The Constitution Committee is appointed by the House of Lords in each session “to examine the constitutional implications of all public bills coming before the House; and to keep under review the operation of the constitution.” Membership The Members of the Constitution Committee are: Lord Beith Lord Hunt of Wirral Lord Morgan Baroness Corston Lord Judge Lord Norton of Louth Baroness Drake Lord MacGregor of Pulham Market Lord Pannick Lord Dunlop Lord Maclennan of Rogart Baroness Taylor of Bolton (Chairman) Declarations of interests A full list of Members’ interests can be found in the Register of Lords’ Interests: http://www.parliament.uk/mps-lords-and-offices/standards-and-interests/register-of-lords- interests Publications All publications of the committee are available at: http://www.parliament.uk/hlconstitution Parliament Live Live coverage of debates and public sessions of the committee’s meetings are available at: http://www.parliamentlive.tv Further information Further information about the House of Lords and its committees, including guidance to witnesses, details of current inquiries and forthcoming meetings is available at: http://www.parliament.uk/business/lords Committee staff The current staff of the committee are Matt Korris (Clerk), Nadine McNally (Policy Analyst) and Andrew Conway (Committee Assistant). Professor Stephen Tierney and Professor Mark Elliott are the legal advisers to the Committee.
    [Show full text]
  • 1St Report of Session 2019-21
    HOUSE OF LORDS Procedure Committee 1st Report of Session 2019–21 Appointment of Parliamentary Works Sponsor Body Spokesperson and Sponsor Body members General and balloted debates for the new parliamentary session Committee statements Privileges Committee: consequences of establishing the Conduct Committee Terms of reference of the European Union Committee Ordered to be printed 2 March 2020 Published by the Authority of the House of Lords HL Paper 29 Procedure Committee The Select Committee on Procedure of the House is appointed each session to consider any proposals for alterations in the procedure of the House that may arise from time to time, and whether the standing orders require to be amended. Membership The members of the Procedure Committee are: Lord Ashton of Hyde Lord McAvoy Lord Bew Lord McFall of Alcluith (Chair) Lord Eames Lord Morris of Aberavon Baroness Evans of Bowes Park Lord Newby Lord Foulkes of Cumnock Baroness Smith of Basildon Lord Fowler (Lord Speaker) Lord Stoneham of Droxford Lord Geddes Baroness Thomas of Winchester Baroness Harris of Richmond Viscount Ullswater Lord Judge Baroness Warwick of Undercliffe Lord Mancroft Alternate members: Baroness Browning (for backbench Conservative members) Baroness Finaly of Llandaff (for Crossbench members, other than the Convenor) Lord Scriven (for backbench Liberal Democrat members) Lord Turnbull (for the Convenor) Declaration of interests A full list of Members’ interests can be found in the Register of Lords’ Interests: http://www.parliament.uk/mps-lords-and-offices/standards-and-interests/register-of-lords-
    [Show full text]
  • Guide to Making Legislation July 2017
    Guide to Making Legislation July 2017 CONTENTS INTRODUCTION TO THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS AND BIDDING FOR LEGISLATION ............... 4 1. How to use this guide and the role of PBL Secretariat .......................................................................................... 5 2. The Government’s legislative programme and the work of the Parliamentary Business and Legislation (PBL) Committee .................................................................................................................................................................... 8 3. Summary of stages in the legislative process ......................................................................................................11 4. Key players in making legislation ........................................................................................................................22 5. Securing a slot in the legislative programme ......................................................................................................25 6. The bill and Bill team management.....................................................................................................................31 7. Collective agreement ..........................................................................................................................................43 PREPARING THE BILL FOR INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................47 8. Preparing the bill for introduction: checklist of tasks to be
    [Show full text]
  • Committee of Selection
    COMMITTEE OF SELECTION Gender balance of House of Lords Select Committee membership - July 2021 1. In December 2018 the UK Gender Sensitive Parliament Audit1 recommended that a Parliamentary body monitor the gender breakdown of MPs and peers and those in leadership positions. The House of Lords Commission subsequently asked the Committee of Selection to carry out annual monitoring of Lords committee membership and chairing.2 2. This is the second such report. Since the first was published in April 2020 there have been significant changes to the structure of House of Lords select committees, with the European Union Committee and its sub-committees replaced by six new sessional committees and one sub-committee. The changes required to establish this new committee structure took place between January and April 2021. 3. The numbers in the table below show the 2021 gender balance of House of Lords select committee membership. The committees included in the table are those whose members are proposed by the Committee of Selection before being appointed by way of motions on the floor of the House. As of 22 July 2021 33.9% of select committee members were female and 66.1% were male.3 The gender balance of the membership of the House of Lords as a whole at the beginning of July 2021 was 28.1% female and 71.9% male.4 When we published the equivalent figures last year 32.6% of select committee members were female and 67.4% were male, while the gender balance of the membership of the House of Lords as a whole was 27.7% female and 72.3% male.
    [Show full text]